MANDHATA SHARM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Mandhata Sharma aggrieved by the order dated 27.6.2011 passed by District Magistrate, Budaun has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the said order and has also sought a mandamus directing respondent No. 3 to permit the petitioner to work as Block Coordinator, Block Asafpur, District Badaun.

(2.) I have heard Sri Somesh Khare, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.C.Chaturvedi, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri C.S.Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 to 4 (hereinafter referred to as the "official respondent"). None appeared on behalf of respondent No. 5. Office report dated 5.9.2011 with respect to service on respondent No. 5 has been perused. RPAD sent to respondent No. 5 has neither returned undelivered nor acknowledgement received back. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit stating that he tried to serve respondent No. 5 personally but he refused. Under the Rules, service on respondent No. 5 is deemed sufficient.

(3.) CONSIDERING the above submission, this Court issued an order on 23.8.2011 directing the respondents No. 1 to 4 to file reply stating in what manner computer knowledge of candidates was examined by Selection Committee and they were also directed to produce relevant record before this Court.